To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

Canadian Gaming News, Vol. 02, Issue 17 (1995, September)

Canadian Gaming News, Vol. 02, Issue 17 (1995, September) - Page 1

Volume 2 Issue 17 September, 1995
Ontario to have Casino
Referendum?
Readers will know that, since our March in-terview
with Premier Mike Harris, we have
taken the position that amendments to the
Act establishing casinos in Ontario would
be limited to requiring local community ref-erendums.
We took this position because
this is what Mr. Harris told us, and subse-quently
confirmed when we asked him to
review our text.
The current wording of the Ontario Casino
Corporation Act, which requires only a
public meeting, and a city council resolu-tion
endorsing a casino, is attractive be-cause
of its short approval time and ' tight'
issue management potential. A ' local refer-endum'
amendment could, however, help
ensure the longer term viability of our in-dustry
by encouraging a greater public ' buy-in'.
As the Goldfarb poll carried in our
June issue showed, casinos would have been
strongly approved if a local referendum had
been held in any major Ontario community
this past Spring. And let's not forget that
in Ontario's first local casino referendum
last Fall, the City of Niagara Falls voted
63% in support of a casino.
Referendum? page #. I
Warren Eugene page # 2
Caribbean Casinos
Developments Page
to Watch
VLTs and page # 5
Casinos
Casino Rama page # 6
Short list
We don't want to sound like die- hards,
mt we have talked with a number of peo-
) le and there is much uncertainty as to
whether or not the Premier's comments
should be taken as government policy. It
should be remembered that they were
nade during an impromptu press scrum
md that this issue has yet to be discussed
) y the government caucus, or by Cabinet.
30 how do we see it?
We see two separate issues. First, Mr.
Harris made a commitment to referen-lums
as part of his successful strategy to
stop the federal level of the Reform Party
: a cross between Ross Perot and Newt
Singrich) from running candidates in the
rune Ontario election. His right- flank
will therefore be watching to see what he
loes. On the other hand, referendums are
xpensive and some will argue that, with
the polls showing strong support for casi-nos,
and a very successful casino already
aperating in Windsor, a referendum
would be a waste of taxpayers' dollars.
This having been said, a province- wide
referendum is not necessarily bad news in
that the Goldfarb poll also showed that
63% of Ontario residents ( total sample
11 13) approved of the decision to open a
casino in Windsor. If there is to be a
province- wide referendum, our second
concern would then relate to how it would
be conducted, and to the crucial issue of
who would lead the ' pro- casino' side.
In a referendum vote you have two advo-cates
- those who support, and those who
oppose the question. One does not stretch
credibility by speculating that the
churches and addiction groups would lead
the ' no' side, but who would lead the
' pro' side? Would the Ontario Casino
Corp be allowed to do this or would the
government, as we expect, insist that the
I Ivan Sack I
OCC remain neutral? As the OCC is
rapidly becoming the central repository for
Ontario casino research, would it still be
allowed to share its research, perhaps with
both sides equally, or would the ' pro' side
be left to work through the issues on its
own? Several large U. S. operators might
be willing to help though we think the On-tario
public would view this as an intru-sion.
The question then becomes, could the
' pro' side mount a campaign sufficient to
maintain current levels of support?
While it was obvious from our conversa-tions
with senior politicians and officials
that Mr. Harris had not consulted widely, if
at all, prior to his comment, it was equally
apparent that everyone was rushing to fall
into line. There is therefore little doubt in
our minds that a province- wide referendum
is now a much greater possibility than it
was just weeks ago.
We hear that, for the moment at least, there
are no plans to include a casino referendum
in the September 26 ' Speech From The
Throne' though we are told that something
could come in conjunction with November
' 97 municipal elections. This would almost
certainly mean that, from the day it opened,
a Niagara Falls, Ontario, casino would be
forced to go head- to- head with casinos in
Niagara Falls and Buffalo, New York.
And where does all this referendum talk
leave the Rama First Nation casino RFP
which is mid- way through consideration?
We hear that the Ontario Casino Corp is
continuing its evaluations on a ' business as
usual' basis.

The University of Lethbridge Library received permission from Ivan Sack to digitize and display this content.

Full-Text

Volume 2 Issue 17 September, 1995
Ontario to have Casino
Referendum?
Readers will know that, since our March in-terview
with Premier Mike Harris, we have
taken the position that amendments to the
Act establishing casinos in Ontario would
be limited to requiring local community ref-erendums.
We took this position because
this is what Mr. Harris told us, and subse-quently
confirmed when we asked him to
review our text.
The current wording of the Ontario Casino
Corporation Act, which requires only a
public meeting, and a city council resolu-tion
endorsing a casino, is attractive be-cause
of its short approval time and ' tight'
issue management potential. A ' local refer-endum'
amendment could, however, help
ensure the longer term viability of our in-dustry
by encouraging a greater public ' buy-in'.
As the Goldfarb poll carried in our
June issue showed, casinos would have been
strongly approved if a local referendum had
been held in any major Ontario community
this past Spring. And let's not forget that
in Ontario's first local casino referendum
last Fall, the City of Niagara Falls voted
63% in support of a casino.
Referendum? page #. I
Warren Eugene page # 2
Caribbean Casinos
Developments Page
to Watch
VLTs and page # 5
Casinos
Casino Rama page # 6
Short list
We don't want to sound like die- hards,
mt we have talked with a number of peo-
) le and there is much uncertainty as to
whether or not the Premier's comments
should be taken as government policy. It
should be remembered that they were
nade during an impromptu press scrum
md that this issue has yet to be discussed
) y the government caucus, or by Cabinet.
30 how do we see it?
We see two separate issues. First, Mr.
Harris made a commitment to referen-lums
as part of his successful strategy to
stop the federal level of the Reform Party
: a cross between Ross Perot and Newt
Singrich) from running candidates in the
rune Ontario election. His right- flank
will therefore be watching to see what he
loes. On the other hand, referendums are
xpensive and some will argue that, with
the polls showing strong support for casi-nos,
and a very successful casino already
aperating in Windsor, a referendum
would be a waste of taxpayers' dollars.
This having been said, a province- wide
referendum is not necessarily bad news in
that the Goldfarb poll also showed that
63% of Ontario residents ( total sample
11 13) approved of the decision to open a
casino in Windsor. If there is to be a
province- wide referendum, our second
concern would then relate to how it would
be conducted, and to the crucial issue of
who would lead the ' pro- casino' side.
In a referendum vote you have two advo-cates
- those who support, and those who
oppose the question. One does not stretch
credibility by speculating that the
churches and addiction groups would lead
the ' no' side, but who would lead the
' pro' side? Would the Ontario Casino
Corp be allowed to do this or would the
government, as we expect, insist that the
I Ivan Sack I
OCC remain neutral? As the OCC is
rapidly becoming the central repository for
Ontario casino research, would it still be
allowed to share its research, perhaps with
both sides equally, or would the ' pro' side
be left to work through the issues on its
own? Several large U. S. operators might
be willing to help though we think the On-tario
public would view this as an intru-sion.
The question then becomes, could the
' pro' side mount a campaign sufficient to
maintain current levels of support?
While it was obvious from our conversa-tions
with senior politicians and officials
that Mr. Harris had not consulted widely, if
at all, prior to his comment, it was equally
apparent that everyone was rushing to fall
into line. There is therefore little doubt in
our minds that a province- wide referendum
is now a much greater possibility than it
was just weeks ago.
We hear that, for the moment at least, there
are no plans to include a casino referendum
in the September 26 ' Speech From The
Throne' though we are told that something
could come in conjunction with November
' 97 municipal elections. This would almost
certainly mean that, from the day it opened,
a Niagara Falls, Ontario, casino would be
forced to go head- to- head with casinos in
Niagara Falls and Buffalo, New York.
And where does all this referendum talk
leave the Rama First Nation casino RFP
which is mid- way through consideration?
We hear that the Ontario Casino Corp is
continuing its evaluations on a ' business as
usual' basis.